The PCE chairs have requested that these two documents be merged before we poll 
the working group for adoption of the resulting draft.  Our rationale for this 
request is below.

From: Jonathan Hardwick
Sent: 06 June 2016 15:50
To: '[email protected]' 
<[email protected]>; 
'[email protected]' 
<[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Merging of draft-palle-pce-stateful-pce-p2mp and 
draft-palle-pce-stateful-pce-initiated-p2mp-lsp

Dear authors

At the most recent meeting of the PCE working group, we determined that there 
was sufficient support for your documents for us to formally poll for working 
group adoption.  However, from the chairs' point of view, these documents 
should be merged beforehand, for the following reasons.


1)      The documents are not overly big or complex, so a merged document would 
not be unwieldy.

2)      The authors and the timeline of these documents are completely aligned.

3)      Working group support for the two documents is unlikely to be different.

4)      For any stateful PCE implementations that do not support initiation, 
there would be no ambiguity about which part of the merged document had been 
implemented.

Please would you merge these two documents?  We can begin a poll for working 
group adoption on a merged version.

Best regards
Jon, JP and Julien


_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Reply via email to